From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To: Dwaipayan Ray <dwaipayanray1@gmail.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Cc: linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [Linux-kernel-mentees] deprecated.rst: deprecated strcpy ? (was: [PATCH] checkpatch: add a new check for strcpy/strlcpy uses)
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2021 01:28:18 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3ffe616d8c3fb54833bfc4d86cb73427cf6c7add.camel@perches.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABJPP5DQ0Y42z9ej_j06+KaQevT3ztWcwGMkismj4qv5EHvnxA@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, 2021-01-05 at 14:29 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 2:14 PM Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 2021-01-05 at 13:53 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> > > strcpy() performs no bounds checking on the destination buffer.
> > > This could result in linear overflows beyond the end of the buffer.
> > >
> > > strlcpy() reads the entire source buffer first. This read
> > > may exceed the destination size limit. This can be both inefficient
> > > and lead to linear read overflows.
> > >
> > > The safe replacement to both of these is to use strscpy() instead.
> > > Add a new checkpatch warning which alerts the user on finding usage of
> > > strcpy() or strlcpy().
> >
> > I do not believe that strscpy is preferred over strcpy.
> >
> > When the size of the output buffer is known to be larger
> > than the input, strcpy is faster.
> >
> > There are about 2k uses of strcpy.
> > Is there a use where strcpy use actually matters?
> > I don't know offhand...
> >
> > But I believe compilers do not optimize away the uses of strscpy
> > to a simple memcpy like they do for strcpy with a const from
> >
> > strcpy(foo, "bar");
> >
>
> Yes the optimization here definitely helps. So in case the programmer
> knows that the destination buffer is always larger, then strcpy() should be
> preferred? I think the documentation might have been too strict about
> strcpy() uses here:
>
> Documentation/process/deprecated.rst:
> "strcpy() performs no bounds checking on the destination buffer. This
> could result in linear overflows beyond the end of the buffer, leading to
> all kinds of misbehaviors. While `CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE=y` and various
> compiler flags help reduce the risk of using this function, there is
> no good reason to add new uses of this function. The safe replacement
> is strscpy(),..."
Kees/Jonathan:
Perhaps this text is overly restrictive.
There are ~2k uses of strcpy in the kernel.
About half of these are where the buffer length of foo is known and the
use is 'strcpy(foo, "bar")' so the compiler converts/optimizes away the
strcpy to memcpy and may not even put "bar" into the string table.
I believe strscpy uses do not have this optimization.
Is there a case where the runtime costs actually matters?
I expect so.
_______________________________________________
Linux-kernel-mentees mailing list
Linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-kernel-mentees
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-01-05 9:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-01-05 8:23 [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH] checkpatch: add a new check for strcpy/strlcpy uses Dwaipayan Ray
2021-01-05 8:44 ` Joe Perches
2021-01-05 8:59 ` Dwaipayan Ray
2021-01-05 9:28 ` Joe Perches [this message]
2021-01-07 21:16 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] deprecated.rst: deprecated strcpy ? (was: [PATCH] checkpatch: add a new check for strcpy/strlcpy uses) Kees Cook
2021-01-08 0:51 ` Joe Perches
2021-01-08 10:05 ` David Laight
2021-01-08 19:48 ` Kees Cook
2021-01-05 10:20 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH] checkpatch: add a new check for strcpy/strlcpy uses David Laight
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3ffe616d8c3fb54833bfc4d86cb73427cf6c7add.camel@perches.com \
--to=joe@perches.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=dwaipayanray1@gmail.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).